ebion wrote: ↑Fri Oct 27, 2023 5:38 pm
Nobody in scholarship is an ad hominum attack on me because it assumes I'm not in scholarship.
Well, I still assume you are not in any relevant field of scholarship, as a scholar in the relevant fields would know Latin (which you don't) or Greek (which you don't either). And no, that's still not an
ad hominem attack, as that assumption results from factual statements you made regarding relevant factors for the question in place and doesn't concern your character or anything like that.
Furthermore, a scholar would be able to read the information that comes with the images on codexsinaiticus.org, which you seem to fail to be able to or chose to ignore.
ebion wrote: ↑Fri Oct 27, 2023 5:38 pm
I think the Sinaticus fraud is very important for reasons Steven touches on in his
Pure Bible Forum:
"And there even could be some elements involving the counter-Reformation attempt to make a new Bible version against the Received Text, and this sorely needed a full Bible companion manuscript to Vaticanus"
But that's the issue, isn't it? The alleged Sinaiticus fraud
would be important if there were any indication that it, indeed, happened. Which there isn't, which is the main reason nobody wants any links to that specific forum. That's the issue with apologetics: They start with the conclusion, look for stuff they think corroborates their conclusion and ignore everything that contradicts it. Which isn't scholarship, btw.
Yeah, like resurrecting this old, obsolete thread.
But thanks for giving me an insight into your thought patterns. Duly noted.